Introduced by Republican Assemblymember Tim Donnelly, AB351 is a strong stand against “indefinite detention” as supposedly authorized by the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2012. It declares such federal power to be unconstitutional and also requires the entire state to refuse to enforce or assist its implementation. A broad coalition officially supported the legislation and moved the normally partisan, and strongly democratic committee to support the republican-introduced legislation. AB351 was supported by the ACLU, Tenth Amendment Center, San Francisco 99% coalition, San Francisco Board of Supervisors, the Libertarian Party of California – and many others.

AB351 establishes the proper constitutional role by first citing the 10th Amendment as limiting the power of the federal government as to that which has been delegated to it and nothing more.

The Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution authorizes the United States federal government to exercise only those powers specifically delegated to it in the United States Constitution.

It then declares the indefinite detention powers under NDAA to be unconstitutional:

Sections 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (NDAA) codifies indefinite military detention without charge or trial of civilians captured far from any battlefield, violating the United States Constitution and corroding our nation’s commitment to the rule of law

Most importantly, the bill requires the entire state apparatus, including all local governments, to refuse to implement the federal act, or any other federal act (such as AUMF) that might be cited to give the same power to the federal government:

It is the policy of this state to refuse to provide material support for or to participate in any way with the implementation within this state of any federal law that purports to authorize indefinite detention of a person within California.

This would make a HUGE dent in any effort to further restrict due process – and would be a big step forward for California. It would also create shockwaves around the rest of the country. As Judge Andrew Napolitano has said recently, such widespread noncompliance can make a federal law “nearly impossible to enforce” (video here). And in those limited situations where enforcement does occur, Rosa Parks has taught us all the power of “NO!” Passage of AB351 would mark the beginning of the end of NDAA indefinite detention in California.

According to committee chair Tom Ammiano, Donnelly spoke “eloquently” in favor of the bill. Donnelly not only reiterated that the Constitution delegates only limited powers to the federal government, but emphasized that violations of the constitution should be met with a firm NO from the state.

“AB351…says the federal government only has the powers enumerated in the Constitution…and does not have the authority here to detain people here without due process.”

“It is important that we in California say NO to human rights abuses that are endangered by the NDAA…instead of quietly complying with unjust and unconstitutional laws”

David Warren, Taxpayers for Improving Public Safety, was a witness in favor and reminded the committee of the indefinite detention of Japanese, Italians, Germans and other people during World War II, “The writ of habeas corpus is the most important right that a citizen has. Unfortunately our history is replete with abuses of that right going back to World War II.”

Art Persyko of the San Francisco 99% Coalition testified in favor as did Nancy Larned, a grassroots member of the Tenth Amendment Center.

“I’m here as a grandmother. I grew up with constitutional rights and due process – my children the same. My grandchildren, not so much. It’s just not right for one person or a small group to decide on those rights.”

Ammiano closed the discussion with kudos and support for the legislation, and the committee proceeded to vote unanimously in favor:

Mr Donnelly, you’ve been very eloquent in your presentation, and have found a zone that we’re all in. I compliment you for that. We got a lot of support for this bill, particularly from local people in my district (San Francisco).

1. Call your Assembly member. Strongly, but respectfully, urge a YES vote on AB351. Let them know that you want to see a vote on principle, not party, and that some issues transcend partisan politics. AB351 is one of those issues – where people from across the political spectrum can set aside differences to do what’s right.

2. Share this information widely. Please pass this along to your friends and family. Also share it with any and all grassroots groups you’re in contact with around the state. Please encourage them to email this information to their members and supporters.

There is absolutely ZERO serious dispute about the fact that the federal government cannot “commandeer” the states to carry out its laws. None. Even the Supreme Court has affirmed this multiple times.

In the 1992 case, New York v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that Congress couldn’t require states to enact specified waste disposal regulations.

In the 1997 case, Printz v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government could not command state law enforcement authorities to conduct background checks on prospective handgun purchasers.

In the 2012 case, National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, the Supreme Court ruled that a significant expansion of Medicaid was not a valid exercise of Congress’s spending power, as it would coerce states to either accept the expansion or risk losing existing Medicaid funding.

In each of these cases, the Supreme Court made is quite clear that their opinion is that the federal government cannot require the states to act, or even coerce them to act through a threat to lose funding. Their opinion is correct. If the feds pass a law, they can sure try to enforce it if they want. But the states absolutely do NOT have to help them in any way.

Tim Donnelly, a Republican, has authored and sponsored the bill and is working to build a strong non-partisan group of supporters to get it passed. Such attacks on due process rise above the usual party politics, and all across the country people from all ends of the political spectrum are demanding an end to “indefinite detention.” Whether it’s 99%’ers, or Tea Partiers – the ACLU or the Tenth Amendment Center – grassroots activists around the state of California know that now is the time to put aside differences and work towards a common goal. Due process for all, that is.

Note: while some believe that the 2013 NDAA eliminated indefinite detention, it does not. Dianne Feinstein introduced a very weak amendment to 2013 – and it failed anyway. 2012 indefinite detention provisions remain in tact – and the Obama administration is aggressively defending them in court.

Also, a case about indefinite detention is still being heard in federal court. Last year, Federal Judge Katherine Forrest struck down these indefinite detention powers as unconstitutional. She issued a temporary court order blocking the use of these powers. That order was revoked by the appeals court and indefinite detention powers remain while the case is currently on appeal but not decided.

Additionally, when asked by Judge Forrest if the federal government was using indefinite detention in violation of her temporary order blocking it, Barack Obama’s attorneys refused to confirm, leaving the door open that the Feds were potentially using this power in secret, even in outright defiance of an order from the federal courts.

Because of all this, and more, California stands on strong ground to reject a federal power which has already been struck down in federal court and is still pending appeal.

These acts of the government is just pissing off the citizens who are now starting to rumble. We need to pull those assholes out of Saramento who are over taxing over regulating and basically useless zombies

obama needs to be stopped he should be trying to be a president even if he doesn’t know how and stay out of the money thats not his to give away and the government budgets already set up way before he came a long because if he continues to be allowed to mess with things he will finally destroy this Country and really he didn’t have the funds I’m sure to have both their files sealed someone else helped them the question is WHO?

The X Amendment states: – “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Perhaps someone can explain to me how Rep. Donnelly’s position on gay marriage, abortion, prop 215, drones, or any other state-rights issue jives with this notion. Rep. Donnelly is neither a Nullifier or a 10ther – he’s a partisan ideologue who parrots everything the most ‘conservative’ radio hosts spout and who hides his lack of leadership experience and absence of any economic or financial acumen behind you-tube sound-bites and mickey-mouse issues infused with the occasional constitutional rhetoric.

As a member of Rep. Donnelly’s assembly area and an advocate of 10th amendment rights, you might not want to get champion someone who is currently on probation for gun violations. He sounds great when he wants us to stand up to for our rights but he couldn’t even stand up to his own wife which is why he ‘forgot’ the gun he tried to sneak by the TSA was in his travel bag to begin with… his wife didn’t want it in the house. If your issue is off-roading or hunting with dogs, or if your satisfied with an an ideologue over his head in state government who spends time working on his second career as political radio pundit, then Rep. Donnelly’s your man but if you’re looking for someone to inspire a wave of Constitutionalism, then someone who was received unemployment checks for years probably isn’t the one to lead the charge off the government tit despite his rhetoric.

It’s a lot easier to say you want to leave a place than it is to actually leave a place. I have lived in California for most of my life, not counting my service time, and have seen it go from a beautiful, rich, and bountiful state to a haven for entitlement seeking people. Not all over, but in any big city where the liberals concentrate and spread their liberal socialist doctrine.
Believe me, I am thinking seriously about getting out of here when I retire, or at least move to the sticks where things aren’t influenced so much by their political correct crap. It’s just a saying. I call it my state because I live there, not because I am proud of what it has become.

This is what I’ve said, They didn’t see 2010 coming from 2008, and they don’t see 2014 coming from 2012! Because real liberals will turn on the aggressive nature of the “progressives” pushing this militant garbage.

how ? can Federal Law be an Actual Law when the Constitution States Differantly ?____& why? should we have to go to Court to “Keep” a Law which the Constitution Entails___________The Group going against the Constitution should be Arrested__no one is ABOVE the LAW—–

no Lori hell has not froze over yet,people are getting there head out of the hole in the ground and are started to pay attention,Cali is as broke as it can be way in the hole,so they need to do something

However exciting this may sound, it hasn’t passed the Assembly or Senate vote, nor has the Governor signed it. Additionally, the bill states that the state will not “provide material support or participate”, it doesn’t say that they will STOP them from arresting you and hauling your butt off to wherever they want to hold you. I have no doubt this will never go any farther than it has. I’ve lived here in Commufornia long enough to know a ruse when I see one and this one is slapping the begeesus out of everyone.

Passed committee. If it gets signed and means any more than any other law in CA, I’ll blink. This is the state that ambushed a guy in court, “lost” him in prison for a week without contact and gave him some special treatment for selling raw milk. This is the state where LAPD beat reporters on film and years later the city coughed up some hush money. This state doesn’t care what the law says when they go to do whatever it is they are going to do.

There’s a link of what our 10th amendment is. This article says it has to go to house and senate next. That everyone needs to call their rep!!!! Here’s a link to find your rep in your area!!
Findourrep.legislature.ca.gov
Tell them you want them to vote YES on AB351!!!

I hate to say it, folks, but the 10th amendment was effectively nullified at the end of the Civil War. That was the deciding point: Are we to have a strong central government? or will states decide their own fates? The question has already been answered, unfortunately. Blame Pickett.

I was just going to say have to read the full article!!! Hasn’t entirely passed yet!!! Everyone needs to follow the steps at the bottom of the stitches and. Call!!!’ And tell them you want them to pass this!!!

The people need to inundate their state legislators with nullification and start talking more seriously about…oh I am going to say it…SECESSION! You cannot nit pick the constitution, deciding one amendment is better to save than the this or that. Case in point, the 2nd Amendment: this is a FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT JUST LIKE DUE PROCESS. I have the right to protect myself with the same weapons that the Feds can buy. The Forefathers knew about power and that we might have to fight our government one day, as absolute power corrupts absolutely. Our Federal government is owned by the world banking cartel, the IMF, and the U.N., and our last hope is retaining our weapons and using our states to stop these psycho globalists. Funny how the NDAA was drafted right as all the Occupy camps were being broken up and signed under the cover of night (New Year’s Eve 2011) without a peep from MSM. WE ARE BANK OWNED.

I wouldn’t be so apt to applaud them just quite yet. Keep in mind..Here’s a state, on the verge of bankruptcy…
So in league, financially, with the Fed and you’re telling me that they’re going to bite the hand that feeds them?
This will be short lived.

Believe it or not, there are a lot of patriotic Americans still fighting the good fight in spite of the lunatics in California. Really NOT cool with fellow Conservative bash this state like a bunch of school children.

Cali is far from “liberal” its ruled by $ imperative. Beemers and Mercedes as far as the eye can see and ppl driving them that live run down apartments. Living beyond your means to keep up with the Joneses. Way to go…finally pulling your heads out of your superficial arses.

It’s easy if you’re concerned about your family’s well being. I commend standing your ground to fight for your Liberty, but there comes a point when you need to be somewhat selfish and look after your family’s security. By all means, stay in California and fight it out. I wish you luck. But what I’m saying is that California is one of the most tyrannical places on earth. There are some great places in the Eastern and Northern parts of the state, but those parts are still connected to the corruption that has flooded LA, San Diego, San Fransisco and other coastal/southern areas. I would never put my family through that. And I’m trying to get my in-laws to move out of the Bay Area. When the crap hits the fan, you don’t want to be anywhere near California! I think every honest person will acknowledge at least that much.

California has a lot of problems , but this may be the first crack in the wall that leads to a return of more constitutional principles . When California starts saying ” WE WILL NOT COMPLY ” who will be next ? New York maybe : )

Yea apparently they’re so worked up over NDAA that they haven’t noticed that their bill also addresses central banking, the Dept of Education, Medicare, Social Security and a host of other things the Feds were never given the power to be involved in.

Don’t get your optimism or enthusiasm up, folks. This’ll be rejected or overturned at higher levels. You’ve got a tyrannical governor, tyrannical representatives, and a tyrannical court system in California. If you really want Liberty, move far away from California (same with places like New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, etc). Relocation is your best option. I highly recommend you read Joel Skousen’s book, “Strategic Relocation: North American Guide to Safe Places.”